MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599454243

Finances of the Dominion of Canada : budget speech delivered by Sir Leonard Tilley, minister of finance, in the House of Commons of Canada, Tuesday, 3rd March, 1885.

2014· article· en· W2599454243 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samuel Leonard Tilley

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominionHouse of CommonsPublic administrationPolitical scienceManagementLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

asy thing for hon.members to say here or elsewhere that the expenditure of the country has increased from $24,000,000 to $30,000,000 or $31,000,000, and to state that that is ample and sufficient evidence to prove the extravagance of the Government.I find on looking over the expenditure of the late Government that from 1874 to 1879 the average expenditure was nearly $24,000,000, I think $23,900,000.The smallest expenditure, I believe, was in 1877-73.It was remarkable that the expenditure that year was less than usual-I will not say what object hon.gentlemen had in reducing it then and increasing it the follow- ing year -but I will take for the purposes of comparison, and in order that hon.gentlemen opposite may have the full benefit of 1877 78, the expenditure for that year, and compare it with the expenditure in 1874, and I will call the attention of the House to each of the items to show that many of those expenditures on which there were increases did not add one dollar to the taxation, and were necessary and justifiable in the public interest.The difference between the expenditure for 1877-78 and 1884 was something like $7,500,000, and I can quite understand that that statement, made in Parliament and out of it, is calculated, without explanation, to mislead the public with regard to the expenditures of the Government.The first item I will consider is the expenditure under the head of railways and canals.The expenditure in 1884 was $1,035,443.81 more than that of 1877-78.Well, Sir, did that cost the country anything ?On the contrary, it was a saving to the country.Let me give you, Mr. Speaker, the receipts and expenditure from 1874 to 1879, for railways and public works, and the receipts and expenditure from 1879 to 1884, as an evidence that that increased expenditure did not cost the country anything, but that it was in the interest of the country and of the revenue.Here are the figures :

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.155 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207